HT Image
HT Image

Counterpoint: Age of Intolerance

Even if a film is historically inaccurate and portrays a dead person critically, do we have the right to ban it? Vir Sanghvi examines...
By Vir Sanghvi | None
UPDATED ON APR 02, 2008 04:07 PM IST

Such is the the climate of intolerance in today’s India that it is almost impossible to write a book or make a movie without having to cope with a mob of protestors who claim that you have offended their caste/community/religion/region/city/grandparents/favourite pets.

Two such protests erupted last week. The first, and more publicised, of the rows related to Ashutosh Gowariker’s Jodhaa Akbar which is still to be released in Rajasthan because of fears that so-called Rajput organisations will vandalise cinema halls where it is shown. The second, and less known, relates to Rani, a fictionalised biography of Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi by the well known author Jaishree Mishra. Apparently the book is insufficiently respectful to the late queen and the Mayawati government has assured the protestors that it will be banned in Uttar Pradesh. Both protests raise several issues which have been insufficiently addressed so far. Here are some of my concerns:

How much historical accuracy is required in a novel or a book? In most of the world, the historical novel is a well-established genre. The idea is that the author picks on a historical incident or character and uses it as a basis for a work of fiction. For instance, though Henry VIII was a real person, nobody expected Robert Bolt to stick closely to the facts when he wrote the acclaimed A Man For All Seasons about the king’s dispute with Sir Thomas More.

Movies are allowed even more latitude. Hollywood’s many Biblical epics have played fast and loose with the stories of the Old and New Testaments. Every Palestinian character has blond hair and blue eyes and when we hear the voice of God, His accent leaves us in no doubt about His nationality. More recently, many critics have argued about the historical authenticity of such films as Elizabeth and Braveheart but nobody has demanded that they be banned for diverging from the history books.

Nor have we insisted on historical accuracy in some of Hindi cinema’s greatest hits. The late Prithviraj Kapoor made a terrific Alexander the Great in Sikander but the film had zero historical authenticity. Similarly, K Asif’s Mughal-e-Azam was more or less entirely made up (there’s some doubt as to whether Anarkali even existed) but this was never an issue.

So why are we insisting on historical authenticity now? Why should India be different from the rest of the world? And why should today’s India have different standards from the India of a few decades ago?

It worries me that nobody bothers to ask these questions. Instead we have let the mob redefine the rules.

Even if a work of fiction is historically inaccurate, it does not follow that it is necessarily critical or slanderous. Let’s take the controversy over the Rani book. One of the complaints is that the Raja of Jhansi is described thus: “not kingly or warrior like at all but small and puny”. This may or may not be true but it is at worst a physical description. The Raja of Jhansi is not described as a mass murderer or an evil man. So what is so slanderous?

The Jodhaa Akbar controversy is even sillier. The basic criticism is that Jodhaa Bai was not Akbar’s wife but his daughter-in-law. Historians are divided on the facts but judging by what I’ve gathered from Rajput descendants of the original queen (including Brajraj Singh of Kishengarh and Padmini of Jaipur) the confusion is unnecessary. Akbar married Harkan Bai, the daughter of the Raja of Amber (which later became the state of Jaipur), but she was never called Jodhaa. In fact, the name Jodhaa is a corruption of Jodh, a name given to princesses from Jodhpur (which Harkan Bai was not). But she was mistakenly called Jodhaa by British writers (including James Todd) and the error was imprinted in the public memory by Mughal-e-Azam. The movie Jodhaa Akbar carries a disclaimer at the beginning clearing up the name confusion and the matter should have ended there. Certainly, there is nothing slanderous or demeaning about the way in which Harkan/Jodhaa is portrayed.

Yet, a simple matter of nomenclature has been allowed to snowball into a major controversy. The mob has effectively banned the film in Rajasthan. And Indian society seems powerless to assert the right of free speech and free expression.

Even if a film is historically inaccurate and portrays a dead person critically, do we have the right to ban it? All over the world, the answer in all liberal societies is always an unequivocal no. For instance, many supporters of Lyndon Johnson were appalled that Oliver Stone’s JFK suggested that Johnson had a hand in John F Kennedy’s assassination. In England, the law takes the line that public figures are fair game even if they’re alive. When Tony Blair was Prime Minister, Peter Morgan wrote the influential TV play

The Deal about Blair and Gordon Brown

, in which neither man came off well. But the British government made no attempt to prevent the telecast of a play which attacked the sitting Prime Minister.

Only in India do we take the line that famous people must be treated with respect and that any fictional representation that is less than reverential must be banned. Elsewhere they argue that the mark of a thriving democracy is that creative artists are free to attack the famous and the powerful.

Even if we take the line that a critical portrayal of a historical figure is offensive, we are still left with another issue: who exactly has the right to take offence?

The laws of defamation are clear. You can’t really defame a dead person unless you can prove that the slanderous remarks actively impact a living entity. For any of the protestors to have the right to take offence, they need to prove that the slander affects their lives or careers.

But in nearly every case, the protests we encounter in India come from publicity hounds, political parties and little known organisations who have no clear link with the historical figure in question. Take the Jodhaa Akbar controversy. If you were to trace a far-fetched connection then you could argue that the present royal family of Jaipur is hurt by the portrayal of the queen. In fact, the Jaipur family is thrilled. Ashutosh Gowariker consulted them before making the movie, and Padmini, the current Maharani, not only loved the film but also released the soundtrack.

So who are the people who object? What is their locus standi? And why do we allow them to get away with it?

I asked at the beginning what the difference was between the eras of Sikander and Mughal-e-Azam and today’s protests. Why have we suddenly become so much more illiberal?

The easy answer is to blame the politicians. Indian politics has become so fragmented and fractured that there is always a political party that sees some advantage in catering to the prejudices of a particular caste or regional grouping. In an era of coalitions and caste-based politics, liberal democracy is the real loser.

But there is a more difficult answer to the question and it has to do with us in the media. Can it be a coincidence that the era of noisy protests has coincided with the explosion of mass media? Is it not true that any two-bit organisation that nobody has ever heard of can suddenly achieve national prominence if it sends six people to vandalise a cinema hall but takes care to invite four television crews to film the incident?

The truth is that in the era of competitive media all of us search compulsively for stories that contain drama and conflict. If there’s violence, that’s so much better. And if the target is sufficiently high-profile — say, a big-budget movie starring Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai — then the story immediately leaps to the top of the news bulletin.

In a column devoted to the need for free speech, it seems hideously inappropriate to castigate the media for exercising their right to freedom of reporting. But some questions need to be asked. Have we become controversy junkies, easy prey for any publicity-hungry nutcase who is ready to stage a demonstration for our cameras? Are we now so desperate for interesting footage that we will afford coverage to anybody who promises to liven up our news bulletins?

Many people have blamed the entire Raj Thackeray-inspired controversy over North Indians in Bombay on the influence of the news channels. I wouldn’t go so far. It was a legitimate story and deserved to be covered.

But I think the time has now come for us to step back and to examine the consequences of the disproportionate and undeserved coverage we provide to anybody who is willing to beat up a taxi driver or burn down a cinema hall.

Of course we must preserve freedom of speech. But as journalists we must also recognise the importance of news judgment and a sense of proportion.

Otherwise we become no more than vehicles of convenience, cheerfully used and abused by any joker who wants to stir up a controversy.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Close
It takes courage to push a conversation that evokes almost zero public sympathy in an audience that is inclined to believe that consent has no place on the marital bed(Shutterstock)
It takes courage to push a conversation that evokes almost zero public sympathy in an audience that is inclined to believe that consent has no place on the marital bed(Shutterstock)

The conversation India refuses to have

By Namita Bhandare
UPDATED ON JAN 08, 2021 08:01 PM IST
In the past few years, India has broken traditional silences on sexual abuse, on consent, and on the rights of sexual minorities. It’s time to break another traditional silence
Close
What other, newer democracies find relatively easy — conducting an election, the counting of votes, the peaceful transition of power — seems to have befuddled the US. There can be and must not be any normalisation of gross prejudice or violence(AP)
What other, newer democracies find relatively easy — conducting an election, the counting of votes, the peaceful transition of power — seems to have befuddled the US. There can be and must not be any normalisation of gross prejudice or violence(AP)

After anarchy in the US, reimagining the middle ground

UPDATED ON JAN 08, 2021 07:53 PM IST
Governments have to learn how to engage with those who did not vote for them. Citizens have to learn how to converse amidst ideological divisions
Close
Mohammed Siraj led India’s breakthrough in the ongoing tour of Australia. But he grew up playing tennis ball cricket and first held a real cricket ball only five years ago.(Getty Images)
Mohammed Siraj led India’s breakthrough in the ongoing tour of Australia. But he grew up playing tennis ball cricket and first held a real cricket ball only five years ago.(Getty Images)

The secret weapons of a fast-bowling nation

By Rudraneil Sengupta | Hindustan Times
UPDATED ON JAN 08, 2021 03:31 PM IST
Surprise finds are making their mark in the India bowling line-up, but they aren’t coming up through the system.
Close
A New York street in the 1920s. Just two decades earlier, in the age of horse-drawn vehicles, people had feared their cities would be buried in manure. Then the internal combustion engine took horses off the streets altogether, a shift often used to illustrate the unpredict-able fallouts of new tech.(Shutterstock)
A New York street in the 1920s. Just two decades earlier, in the age of horse-drawn vehicles, people had feared their cities would be buried in manure. Then the internal combustion engine took horses off the streets altogether, a shift often used to illustrate the unpredict-able fallouts of new tech.(Shutterstock)

The horseshit paradox: Why fears about tech are wildly exaggerated

By Charles Assisi | Hindustan Times
UPDATED ON JAN 08, 2021 03:11 PM IST
Our world runs on complexity. And no machine we have created — or look likely to create — can truly navigate that complexity by itself, says Charles Assisi.
Close
It is no surprise that all kinds of protests are being seen in many parts of the world at the moment(SHUTTERSTOCK)
It is no surprise that all kinds of protests are being seen in many parts of the world at the moment(SHUTTERSTOCK)

This decade will be decisive for democracy, capitalism

By Shashi Shekhar
UPDATED ON JAN 03, 2021 10:07 PM IST
There is another fact which needs attention. Human civilisation has always discovered new light in the darkest days of crisis. With this hope, let us welcome this new decade.
Close
A vibrant corporate capitalist base also leads to additional revenues for the State — which, in turn, can be used for greater welfare for the marginalised and creating a more level-playing field in terms of opportunities(Sonu Mehta/HT PHOTO)
A vibrant corporate capitalist base also leads to additional revenues for the State — which, in turn, can be used for greater welfare for the marginalised and creating a more level-playing field in terms of opportunities(Sonu Mehta/HT PHOTO)

In defence of reformed capitalism

PUBLISHED ON JAN 02, 2021 07:05 PM IST
Targeting corporate capitalism won’t help. It is essential for growth and democracy. Focus on reforming it.
Close
A health worker prepares a syringe to inoculate a volunteer with a Covid-19 vaccine, Lima, December 9, 2020(AFP)
A health worker prepares a syringe to inoculate a volunteer with a Covid-19 vaccine, Lima, December 9, 2020(AFP)

A robust public broadcaster can guard against anti-vaccine rumours

By Mark Tully
PUBLISHED ON JAN 02, 2021 07:02 PM IST
There seems no reason to doubt that a large number of Indians are, to say the least, undiscriminating in the source of news they chose to watch. This will make them liable to fall prey to false information which can undermine the vaccination campaign.
Close
The silence and loneliness of being on my own is no longer intimidating. In fact - and I know that sounds a little perverse – I’ve enjoyed it. So this morning I feel I don’t want to lose it. At least, not completely.(HTPHOTO)
The silence and loneliness of being on my own is no longer intimidating. In fact - and I know that sounds a little perverse – I’ve enjoyed it. So this morning I feel I don’t want to lose it. At least, not completely.(HTPHOTO)

Goodbye to all that? I’m not so sure

UPDATED ON JAN 02, 2021 06:55 PM IST
The honest truth – and you’ve probably guessed it by now – is that I’m going into 2021 with a little trepidation or, if that’s too strong a word, more than a touch of hesitation.
Close
n many ways, Modi’s economic vision resembles that of the United Kingdom prime minister Margaret Thatcher and the United States President Ronald Reagan. Both faced an avalanche of opposition to their push for economic reforms(PTI)
n many ways, Modi’s economic vision resembles that of the United Kingdom prime minister Margaret Thatcher and the United States President Ronald Reagan. Both faced an avalanche of opposition to their push for economic reforms(PTI)

Farm stir: Latest attempt to stop Modi’s reforms

By Baijayant ‘Jay’ Panda
PUBLISHED ON JAN 01, 2021 08:06 PM IST
The Opposition may continue to denigrate him, but millions see in the PM a rare determination and willingness to take risks and cleanse the rot
Close
US President-elect Joe Biden in Delaware, December 29, 2020(REUTERS)
US President-elect Joe Biden in Delaware, December 29, 2020(REUTERS)

Biden has no record of missteps on India

PUBLISHED ON JAN 01, 2021 08:06 PM IST
With the Chinese amassing troops along the border, Indians want to see more, even as they acknowledge that the US will not conduct its foreign policy to please India, echoing a Democratic congressional aide who is normally sympathetic to India but is frustrated by “constant pushing on China”.
Close
Ancient calendars could be intricate, beautiful, but confusing. Above is a section of the ancient Mayan calendar.(Shutterstock)
Ancient calendars could be intricate, beautiful, but confusing. Above is a section of the ancient Mayan calendar.(Shutterstock)

Lend me your years: How the Indian National Calendar came into being

By Rachel Lopez | Hindustan Times
UPDATED ON JAN 02, 2021 08:29 PM IST
See how, back in 1955, an elite team headed by astrophysicist Meghnad Saha untangled India’s confusing variety of almanacs.
Close
An aangan in an old home in Mehrauli, New Delhi. A fixture since the time of the Indus Valley Civilisation, the courtyard faded away with the coming of Western-style architecture during colonial rule.(Mayank Austen Soofi)
An aangan in an old home in Mehrauli, New Delhi. A fixture since the time of the Indus Valley Civilisation, the courtyard faded away with the coming of Western-style architecture during colonial rule.(Mayank Austen Soofi)

Poonam Saxena writes on the true heart of the Indian home, the aangan

By Poonam Saxena | Hindustan Times
UPDATED ON JAN 01, 2021 07:04 PM IST
It now lives on largely in books and film, but the courtyard was where we cooked, celebrated, slept under the stars on summer nights.
Close
After a traumatic and turbulent 2020, it’s time to ring in a New Year with hope. And since Rabindranath Tagore is being rediscovered by our netas ahead of the Bengal elections, this is a prayer for India in 2021 that draws inspiration from the great poet-laureate.(Raj K Raj/HT PHOTO)
After a traumatic and turbulent 2020, it’s time to ring in a New Year with hope. And since Rabindranath Tagore is being rediscovered by our netas ahead of the Bengal elections, this is a prayer for India in 2021 that draws inspiration from the great poet-laureate.(Raj K Raj/HT PHOTO)

A ‘new’ India can’t be built by abandoning the core values of our founding fathers

UPDATED ON JAN 01, 2021 06:01 AM IST
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high. Where an Indian identity is determined by citizenship, and not divided by the narrow domestic walls of caste, region or religion. Where true secularism demands that no state authority promote or discriminate against any religion, where equal respect for all faiths must be the basis of our constitutional secularism.
Close
The farmers’ protest may be geographically limited, but the ripples it has caused are international.(ANI)
The farmers’ protest may be geographically limited, but the ripples it has caused are international.(ANI)

The year is almost over, but scars will remain

By Shashi Shekhar
PUBLISHED ON DEC 27, 2020 06:13 PM IST
The year 2020 will be known as a year of bias, discontent, isolation and apprehensions. These can be brushed away by blaming the pandemic, but the virus merely amplified existing tendencies.
Close
The argument Covid-19 did not permit the session is specious. For a start, Parliament’s earlier functioning disproves it. The monsoon session was held in September when daily cases crossed 95,000. So how can a situation when the increase has reduced to under 25,000 be a credible reason for not holding the winter session?(Sonu Mehta/HT PHOTO)
The argument Covid-19 did not permit the session is specious. For a start, Parliament’s earlier functioning disproves it. The monsoon session was held in September when daily cases crossed 95,000. So how can a situation when the increase has reduced to under 25,000 be a credible reason for not holding the winter session?(Sonu Mehta/HT PHOTO)

Parliament should sit more often

UPDATED ON DEC 26, 2020 07:36 PM IST
The bigger moral argument rests on the belief Parliament is special. It represents our nation. It speaks for us and symbolises our resolve. So if the temple of our democracy ducks the challenge of functioning in a time of the virus what’s the example it sets for the rest of us and what’s the message it sends to the world beyond our borders?
Close
SHARE
Story Saved
OPEN APP